TN: “Possessions” in search clause of state const. gives REP in rural hunting land

Because the Tennessee Constitution uses “possessions” rather than “effects,” plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy in rural land that he used that wildlife officers entered upon to enforce hunting laws. Rainwaters v. Tenn. Wildlife Res. Agency, 2024 Tenn. App. LEXIS 208 (May 9, 2024).

Petitioner’s 2254 claim that his search warrant paperwork had Brady material in it for trial, stuff he didn’t see before trial, is defaulted by not having raised it before. Paape v. Baker, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 84479 (N.D. Ill. May 9, 2024).*

Defendant was an attorney convicted of swindling a client out of $15,000. The search warrant for her office electronics was constitutionally particular under both the Fourth Amendment and the state constitution. In addition, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt based on other documentary evidence that proved the case. State v. McNeilly, 2024 Minn. LEXIS 232 (May 8, 2024).*

This entry was posted in Particularity, State constitution, Waiver. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.